ایروینگ در مقابل لیپستادت

Transcripts

1MR RAMPTON: I thought bundle C was the witness bundle, but it 2is obviously something different. 3MR IRVING: There should be three or four bundle Cs over there. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: It has "Halle" in the top right-hand corner 5under the "C". 6MR IRVING: "Halle" in the top right-hand corner and also ---- 7MR RAMPTON: I do not think I have got that. 8MR IRVING: I am sorry, could his Lordship possibly have a 9slightly better picture? 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. 11MR IRVING: My Lord, first of all, let me say that this is a 12matter which goes to the issue of evidence, the 13admissibility. It also goes to the question of the 14conduct of the case which has a bearing on damages and 15costs. So, I would ask your Lordship to bear those three 16matters in mind. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I think I only really need to trouble 18you about admissibility. 19MR IRVING: At this stage. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you want to say anything about damages, 21then do that in your final speech. I understand the point 22you are making, but we are only really concerned with 23admissibility now. 24MR IRVING: Well, in that case that makes this session this 25morning much briefer because I was about to take your 26Lordship through the rather sorry history of how this

. P-6

1evidence was withheld from me. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think now is the right time to do 3that. What you are, presumably, going to say (and I 4express no view about it) is that the way in which they 5have dealt with this material is an illustration of the 6high handed way the Defendants have behaved and the 7offensive way in which they have conducted their case 8generally, is that the kind of point you are making? 9MR IRVING: I would have used different adjectives, but that is 10certainly my case, my Lord, that they have used muscle, 11they have used wealth, they have used power, they have 12used experience -- they are one of the most experienced 13firms of solicitors in this country, and I make no 14criticism of that fact -- against myself as a litigant to 15try to conceal evidence from me, although the Second 16Defendant had sworn an affidavit, they then referred me to 17the affidavit to prevent me from making further enquiries 18saying, "You can go behind that when the time comes to 19cross-examine", which, of course, has been denied me, that 20opportunity; and they have had these three versions of the 21Halle video in their hands, the Thames Television version 22as broadcast, the Dispatches version and then also the 23heavily edited version and then there is the raw version 24which I have looked at two or three times, particularly 25relating to the episode where I am standing making the 26speech in Halle. That too has been cut by the cameraman.

. P-7

1 If they are proposing to attach any weight to 2this, then I would wish to make objections which your 3Lordship can well apprehend what those objections would be 4as to the admissibility. It is edited material, as a 5document, a video is a document within the terms of the 6rules of evidence and the Rules of the Supreme Court. 7That is why I made the original application under rule 24 8I think 13 or 16 to have that material struck out because 9of the withholding of the evidence from me. We had quite 10an intensive session and Master Trench, because the 11solicitors in that case broke an undertaking to bring the 12originals to the High Court for the hearing before Master 13Trench, I was unable to establish that it was originals 14and, therefore, not privileged material. But that is, of 15course, the other matter. That goes to the conduct of the 16case. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Just concentrate on admissibility. As 18I understand it, you do not dispute that what was shown in 19court the other day is from a tape, but you say that it 20has been so heavily edited as to give a false impression 21of what actually happened? 22MR IRVING: It does not give ---- 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is that the way you put it? 24MR IRVING: It does not give a complete record of my speech, my 25Lord. It omits major parts which, in fact, as your 26Lordship would see from the bundle of the letters I wrote

. P-8

1before I even was aware the tape existed when I was 2applying to all the television companies for the content 3of the speech, if your Lordship were to look at the 4letters that I wrote in April 1993 to all the television 5companies frantically trying to find anyone who had a copy 6of the original film, those are round about page 19, those 7are typical letters. Then I swore affidavits in Australia 8in 1994, that is long before this action was initiated, 9the present action, saying what was in it; the fact that 10I reprimanded the people for making these stupid slogans, 11and the fact that in the part of the speech that is cut 12out I said to the audience, "You people are all young. 13I am now old. It is the other way round. It used to be 14the old people sitting in front of me and me, the young 15person, talking to me, but now you, people, are young, 16I am old. I am talking to you. You are Germany's 17future. The world's eyes are upon you, you have to start 18behaving". That material, unfortunately, is part of the 19material that has been cut out of the video tape. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, so, I mean, what you are really saying 21is that even in its unedited form, that is to say, before 22the Defendants, as it were, got their hands on it, if 23indeed they did, it gives a false impression because the 24original team -- was it an Australian team -- did not 25actually video, or This Week or whoever it was, the whole 26of what you said?

. P-9

1MR IRVING: The particular one which we have is the This Week 2raw footage and it stops and starts, if I can put it like 3that? 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, I appreciate that. 5MR IRVING: Therefore, it is an incomplete record of my 6speech. It may be a complete record or give a good image, 7and I admit this, of the kind of atmosphere and the flag 8waving, and this kind of thing, and I possibly even say 9that against myself, but as far as the content of my 10speech is concerned, it is a dodgy record. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. It seems to me what you are telling me 12now really does not amount to an objection as to the 13admissibility of the tape, but is rather a submission you 14want to make that it is so heavily edited that it does not 15give a fair impression of what actually happened. It 16seems to me, perhaps, to follow that the way to deal with 17the problem is not to rule the tape inadmissible, but to 18let you, if you have not already done so, indicate what it 19is that has not been taped which would give a completely 20different impression of what you said at that meeting. 21MR IRVING: Not only that, my Lord, but also the implication, 22the false implication, that may be given that because 23certain people are visible on the video, therefore, I knew 24them which, of course, easily obtained by cross-cutting 25and by cutting out large chunks. I would have preferred 26your Lordship to make a simple ruling that the tape may be